Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 114

Thread: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

  1. #101
    Tavern Bartender
    Pussy Grabbin' Beaver
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,457
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Since you didnt answer my question, I will ask again:
    What % of the big 3 payroll (inc benefits) goes to the CEOs?
    What % of the payroll (inc benefits) goes to UAW workers?
    It does not matter because there are a lot more UAW workers than CEOs, LOL. Of course a lot more goes to the average joe.

    Now let's talk percentages. Richard Wagoner makes $11,000 an hour. What's the scale, compared to the UAW workers?
    No men are anywhere, and Im allowed to go in, because Im the owner of the pageant and therefore Im inspecting it, Trump said... Is everyone OK? You know, theyre standing there with no clothes. Is everybody OK? And you see these incredible looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that.

  2. #102
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground View Post
    It does not matter because there are a lot more UAW workers than CEOs, LOL. Of course a lot more goes to the average joe.
    And so, given that and the fact that the bailout bill created limitations on CEO/shareholder compensation, which segemnt of their labor costs makes more sense to address?

  3. #103
    Advisor Keorythe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    08-05-14 @ 03:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    440

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Quote Originally Posted by Middleground View Post
    Is a CEO really worth that much more, especially one who's doing a lousy job? I think it was Roosevelt who said that the gap between salaries should not exceed 15-1.
    Oh, no a lousy CEO should be booted right away. The reason they're paid that much is to make the company profitable in the first place. I'm all for kicking them to the curb if they fail in that job. But when they are doing what they were brought on to do, then yes I'm all for paying them huge sums. Like football, you need to sweeten the pot to bring in people with talent. You pay them accordingly when they're in charge of the ENTIRE company wellbeing, not just a section of the line. These guys are doing a poor job and should be removed with no severance packages.



    Please provide a link, as from what I've seen so far, those number are NOT accurate. At least since 2007, new assembly-line workers make $12-15 hr, with less benefits. From The New Republic:

    [I]Let's start with the fact that it's not $70 per hour in wages. According to Kristin Dziczek of the Center for Automative Research--who was my primary source for the figures you are about to read--average wages for workers at Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors were just $28 per hour as of 2007.

    Assembly Line
    Don't really need to paste a link since yours already backs up what I said. Your glassdoor link requires a sign-in btw.

    $12 an hour for new hires? Would you like to know how that is accomplished?

    Two-tier wage structure, as those 5,000 new hires who were previously temp will be brought in at their current wage of $18/hour, rather than the $28/hour current full-timers earn

    That was later renegotiated to $23 after a 6month trial. While you're checking out the link, take a nice look at some of the other bonuses the UAW got out of the deal...including the wage bonuses to vets and health care trust fund...

    Breaking down the GM Strike: who got what - Autoblog


    You want the US to become China? Is that what you want? How about this... how about build better cars that people want, and limit the number of cheap labour imports? How 'bout them apples?
    People want affordable cars. The cheap labour imports are pretty decent quality and are the kind of stuff people want. Sorry, thats just the way it is. I gave up my F-150 a while back. I know, thats blasphemy in Texas. But my little imported 4cyln standard transmission 4 door gets me 36mpg despite having put over 150k miles on it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope
    And talk about quality, eh, what's a little melamine in our baby food, candy, pet food et al., I mean you can go to any Wal-Mart and see the high quality of goods you can get on the cheap.
    Sure, I'll add that to my botchulism spinach and Mad Cow disease meat please. Oh wait, those are western products.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope
    I don't really even know what you mean by that.
    Buy American! Buy American! Buy American! Its a mantra thats repeated over and over again started by the car companies. Well I don't want to buy another Ford or Chevy. Sorry.

    Quote Originally Posted by SLippery Slope
    Do you really think that the CEO of GM works 1000% harder than the average person he employs?

    The problem is that the top 1% somehow convinced a lot of people that businesses are responsible to their shareholders instead of their employees. But the truth is that employees make business profitable NOT the shareholders.
    Uh, considering that the action of a single CEO affects the entire business and the future jobs of the entire workforce I'd say yes definitely.

    Sorry friend but employees make the business profitable to doing the job they were hired to do or make the product they were hired to make. There are some jobs where innovation and ingenuity are critical to making a business profitable...this isn't one of them.



    The United States of America is going to have to come to grips with the fact that in this new global economy, labor is no longer the powerhouse it used to be. We need to retool and redevelop our manufacturing sources to be more efficient and technologically advanced to compete in the world.

    You people keep bringing up China, and yet they just released a gas/electric hybrid. Do you see the implications yet? Can you imagine if it turns out to be "ok" while having a $18,000 price tag?
    Last edited by Keorythe; 12-15-08 at 12:53 PM.
    Freedom is... never more than one generation away from extinction. Every generation has to learn how to protect and defend it, or its gone and gone for a long, long time- Ronald Reagan

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Quote Originally Posted by Keorythe View Post
    Sure, I'll add that to my botchulism spinach and Mad Cow disease meat please. Oh wait, those are western products.
    Those are a product of a failed FDA. Thanks republicans, for underfunding government agencies so that they are ineffective.

    Buy American! Buy American! Buy American! Its a mantra thats repeated over and over again started by the car companies. Well I don't want to buy another Ford or Chevy. Sorry.
    I thought "look for the union label" was first but no matter. I am still confused as to what point you're trying to make. You prefer a foreign car and...?

    Uh, considering that the action of a single CEO affects the entire business and the future jobs of the entire workforce I'd say yes definitely.
    Uh, that makes him more responsible but the question was does he WORK that much harder to justify the compensation gap?

    Sorry friend but employees make the business profitable to doing the job they were hired to do or make the product they were hired to make. There are some jobs where innovation and ingenuity are critical to making a business profitable...this isn't one of them.
    Then the guys in R&D should be pulling down those same numbers... it's crap and your attempts at justifying it are transparent. I agree that the head of the company should make more than everyone else but THAT much more? No, that is simply greed gone crazy.

    The United States of America is going to have to come to grips with the fact that in this new global economy, labor is no longer the powerhouse it used to be. We need to retool and redevelop our manufacturing sources to be more efficient and technologically advanced to compete in the world.
    Yeah, that sounds really progressive and we've all heard it before. But isn't it similar to saying, - well, we opened up the dam and all the water drained out so in this age of not having any water we'll have to figure out new and better ways to grow food... Shouldn't someone say - hey ****er, how about we kick your ass for opening up the dam in the first place, then close the dam and let it start refilling, in the mean time YOU buy us all food?

    You people keep bringing up China, and yet they just released a gas/electric hybrid. Do you see the implications yet? Can you imagine if it turns out to be "ok" while having a $18,000 price tag?
    Depends on how much it actually costs to manufacture instead of what's left over after the COMMUNIST government subsidized it. Besides, we are bringing up COMMUNIST China in reference to wages mostly.

  5. #105
    Advisor Keorythe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    08-05-14 @ 03:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    440

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Quote Originally Posted by Slippery Slope View Post
    Those are a product of a failed FDA. Thanks republicans, for underfunding government agencies so that they are ineffective.
    Touche', nice subject derail, and nice jab at the party. But as usual, throwing money at a problem agency that doesn't have a funding problem isn't going to fix the issue.


    I thought "look for the union label" was first but no matter. I am still confused as to what point you're trying to make. You prefer a foreign car and...?
    Go back and read the last posts and get yourself up to speed with the rest of the discussion before you please. If you're still confused you can google the pro-American campaigns that the auto industry has put out for years now.


    Uh, that makes him more responsible but the question was does he WORK that much harder to justify the compensation gap?
    Oh, you brought up the word "harder" which makes for a good class warfare opener. Appropriate subject is, is the work more "critical". Then the answer is yes.


    Then the guys in R&D should be pulling down those same numbers... it's crap and your attempts at justifying it are transparent. I agree that the head of the company should make more than everyone else but THAT much more? No, that is simply greed gone crazy.
    R&D guys get paid a pretty heft amount of cash compared to line guys. But R&D puts out alot of ideas and concepts. The CEO's are the ones that have to decide which one is more financially viable for the company. R&D isn't "in house" as much as it used to be either. Lots of subcontractors are brought in these days.


    Yeah, that sounds really progressive and we've all heard it before. But isn't it similar to saying, - well, we opened up the dam and all the water drained out so in this age of not having any water we'll have to figure out new and better ways to grow food... Shouldn't someone say - hey ****er, how about we kick your ass for opening up the dam in the first place, then close the dam and let it start refilling, in the mean time YOU buy us all food?
    Great analogy, unfortunately its the shareholders that are the ones asking for the food since they're the ones investing money into the company. As I mentioned above, I'm all for kicking these guys to the curb for a crappy job they've done and many companies would do just that. Good experience corporate management is a competitive arena much like an American Football freelance draft. You have put out some sweet deals to get those star players but be willing to trade them if they end up sucking. Thats the one big problem here. Instead of a lower end trade off these guys get some big severance packages. That part needs to change.

    Depends on how much it actually costs to manufacture instead of what's left over after the COMMUNIST government subsidized it. Besides, we are bringing up COMMUNIST China in reference to wages mostly.
    Yup we bring up China because in a global market they could stand to supercede us in manufacturing if they get their act together anytime soon. Something plausible within the next 20 years. If the Big 3 haven't restructured to be competitive against the other auto manufacturers AND the future Chinese then they're just money sinkholes of walking dead.

    I hate to sound cold but employees always have been and always will be a liability on the books of any business. Until you accept that point you'll never really understand how economies work. That they've decided to make their livelihood dependent on the income of a single business/industry doesn't matter. They are a self determined entity which can relocate to a new job, switch to working for a competitor, re-educate to a new industry, or start their own businesses. Businesses don't have those options without a complete restructuring and devaluing process. But then chpt. 11 gives that option.
    Freedom is... never more than one generation away from extinction. Every generation has to learn how to protect and defend it, or its gone and gone for a long, long time- Ronald Reagan

  6. #106
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Quote Originally Posted by Keorythe View Post
    Touche', nice subject derail, and nice jab at the party. But as usual, throwing money at a problem agency that doesn't have a funding problem isn't going to fix the issue.
    So you think some of the regulatory agencies haven'y been underfunded and then gutted to try and compensate?

    FDA is having difficulty meeting the high expectations of all its constituencies because of an ever-expanding portfolio of oversight and regulatory responsibilities, coupled with depleted resources and a decimated work force. The need to establish a host of new rules and policies to implement FDAAA makes matters worse, at least for the short run.

    The situation has become so serious that John Jenkins, director of CDER's Office of New Drugs, is giving review division chiefs leeway to "reduce work as needed on a case-by-case basis," even if that means missing user fee review deadlines. Jenkins explained to reporters that his office cannot keep up with growing requests to meet with sponsors, to provide special protocol assessments for innovative therapies, to fulfill information demands from Congress, and still meet stated user fee timelines. Jenkins noted that there is "no specific end date" to the possibility of missing Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) deadlines because it may take years to hire all the necessary personnel to remedy the situation.
    An Underfunded FDA Fights Back - Under fire, FDA is taking steps to regain its stature as an effective science-based regulatory agency. - BioPharm International

    Report: FDA underfunded, understaffed - FiercePharma

    Food safety inspectors struggle with swelling volume of imports | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Mexico News

    FDA Fails to Protect Americans from Dangerous Drugs and Unsafe Foods ~ Newsroom ~ News from CSPI

    Bush Administration Undermines Public Protections with Executive Order Amendments

    President signs directive to second-guess regulatory decisions: As if slashing the budgets of U.S. regulatory agencies including the EPA and the Food and Drug Administration weren't enough, George W. Bush signed another executive order that increases Administration influence, installing political appointees to head the agenciesoften representatives from the very industries they are charged with regulating. According to the New York Times, "The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president's priorities. This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts."
    Those are just a few of many.

    Go back and read the last posts and get yourself up to speed with the rest of the discussion before you please. If you're still confused you can google the pro-American campaigns that the auto industry has put out for years now.
    Nice attack, but I did read the entire thread up to where I posted. As I said, "I thought "look for the union label" was first but no matter. I am still confused as to what point you're trying to make. You prefer a foreign car and...?"
    So what is your point? You failed to answer the actual question.

    Oh, you brought up the word "harder" which makes for a good class warfare opener. Appropriate subject is, is the work more "critical". Then the answer is yes.
    R&D guys get paid a pretty heft amount of cash compared to line guys. But R&D puts out alot of ideas and concepts. The CEO's are the ones that have to decide which one is more financially viable for the company. R&D isn't "in house" as much as it used to be either. Lots of subcontractors are brought in these days.
    Fine, you think that a CEO's job is critical enough to justify such huge gaps in compensation between themselves and the lowest paid worker? How did business ever function in the past?
    If you just consider the average compensation (wages plus benefits) of full-time year-round workers in non-managerial jobs - roughly $40,000 - CEO pay is more like 270 times bigger than the average Joe's. That's still a far cry from days gone by. In 1989, for instance, U.S. CEOs of large companies earned 71 times more than the average worker, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

    The IPS/UFE report also compared U.S. CEO pay to that of leaders in other fields and other countries. The top 20 CEOs of U.S. companies made an average of $36.4 million in 2006. That's 204 times that of the 20 highest paid U.S. military generals, and 38 times that of the 20 highest-paid non-profit leaders. They also made three times more than the top 20 CEOs of European companies who had booked higher sales numbers than their U.S. counterparts.

    The pay gap numbers don't include the value of the many perks CEOs receive, which averaged $438,342, according to the report. Nor do they include the pension benefits CEOs receive.
    Great analogy, unfortunately its the shareholders that are the ones asking for the food since they're the ones investing money into the company.
    Of course, but it gets skewed by CEO/BoD compensation. Shareholders (major investors) want bigger returns if CEO's are going to be paid so much. You seem to be happy to ignore the past in favor of the way things are run today but isn't that sorta the problem we are discussing? We allowed corporations to go crazy because we have been jumping from bubble to bubble with drastic recession in between all so we can feed our greed and now we've got a HUGE recession going on and people are starting to look at our debtors society. I mean people run up their credit cards on crap from wal-mart just so they can have more. I never had my own TV in my room when I was a kid, how did I ever manage to make it through the day... it's greed. We've been told that the more you have the better life will be, even after 9/11 the President just said to go shopping..

    As I mentioned above, I'm all for kicking these guys to the curb for a crappy job they've done and many companies would do just that. Good experience corporate management is a competitive arena much like an American Football freelance draft. You have put out some sweet deals to get those star players but be willing to trade them if they end up sucking. Thats the one big problem here. Instead of a lower end trade off these guys get some big severance packages. That part needs to change.
    But the comparison you make is weak. How do the CORPORATIONS that run those football teams get that money? By raising ticket sales and ancillary sale of food and merchandise. So WE pay more to see the players. But you're right, we need to change that. And of course let's not forget that WE buy our 2 year olds $300 shoes... The whole country needs an attitude change. But advertising really does work and the more you tell people they need more stuff, the more they believe it. It's a vicious circle but the loser is always the consumer.

    Yup we bring up China because in a global market they could stand to supercede us in manufacturing if they get their act together anytime soon.
    Because we moved our manufacturing there so that corporations could make more money, putting Americans out of work. But that's ok, they make the stuff cheaper (price and quality) so we buy more and more of the garbage that used to be made here. China isn't seeing this great economic boom because they came up with great things we need, they are booming because we gave them the specs and said, "make it cheaper".

    Something plausible within the next 20 years. If the Big 3 haven't restructured to be competitive against the other auto manufacturers AND the future Chinese then they're just money sinkholes of walking dead.
    Yeah, but what's the first thing the republicans go for? Worker compensation. Sure, make the car in TN. where they don't have a union... that means lower compensation. Why is that the right way to go? Right, because in your next paragraph you explain that worker compensation is the major drag on a companies finances.

    I hate to sound cold but employees always have been and always will be a liability on the books of any business. Until you accept that point you'll never really understand how economies work.
    I understand and accept that just fine. So what? You HAVE TO HAVE workers just like you HAVE TO HAVE a CEO. It's a business expense.

    That they've decided to make their livelihood dependent on the income of a single business/industry doesn't matter. They are a self determined entity which can relocate to a new job, switch to working for a competitor, re-educate to a new industry, or start their own businesses.
    This is the republican mantra. It sounds good in theory but it's proven to be bull**** in the real world. Doesn't stop repubs from saying it at every opportunity just to reaffirm the notion in the public consciousness. The truth however is that people have roots in their communities and not everyone is financially willing or able to just pack up and move off to another city for $2/hr more... My family has lived as farmers in southern Il. since 1835 on the same land. I was the first of my line to leave the farm. It's easy for me because I joined the military but my cousins can't just pack up and move their families. I happen to have a more adventurous spirit or whatever and believe me, there have been tough times when I wished I had that family and community support. Not everyone can do that.

    Businesses don't have those options without a complete restructuring and devaluing process. But then chpt. 11 gives that option.
    It's the same for workers but on a smaller scale. The scale however is equivolent. Families don't have those options without complete restructuring and devaluing. You know, family structure, community value... Bankruptcy is much harder on a family than a business. Thanks Republicans for taking care of the credit card and finance companies by changing bankruptcy laws to screw the people and benefit the corps...
    Last edited by Slippery Slope; 12-17-08 at 04:10 PM.

  7. #107
    Sage
    First Thought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Last Seen
    12-01-10 @ 03:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,218

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    "An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." - Gandhi

  8. #108
    Tavern Bartender
    Pussy Grabbin' Beaver
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,457
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Great post, Slippery Slope.
    No men are anywhere, and Im allowed to go in, because Im the owner of the pageant and therefore Im inspecting it, Trump said... Is everyone OK? You know, theyre standing there with no clothes. Is everybody OK? And you see these incredible looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-24-09 @ 08:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    964

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    The million dollars question is, what if the 700 billion were never requested by the Bush administration to bailout banks and other companies?

    We are witness that the car companies weren't in the original list, as weren't the applications of governors and small private companies.

    The car companies saw the opportunity to have a cut from those billions and they came out suddenly from one day to another with their crisis (known long ago) and the need of help.

    Now, they are adding great drama to their acting, Chrysler, for example, is announcing that will close its doors for a month as an emergency meassurement to deal with its economical crisis.

    I still skeptical that giving them money will fix their current failure of selling cars, definitively the US car industry has fell and the only solution is to make a restructuring of the companies before giving them any help.

    After owning american cars in the past, I switched to foreing cars and this is regardless of the comsumption of gas, my last new car is a 6 cylinder, 3.5 liters, that make 16 to 18 miles per gallon in the city but I don't care, I like the car, its style, its excellent machine and its warranty. Its price was at the level of the american cars of similar manufacturing, but as I have had lots of problems with them, I prefer now the foreing cars.

    And, I'm not the only one, if foreing car companies are in much better economical shape selling millions of cars in US, I think that people here in US "think and feel" the same as I do. Even worst, in the past the government used to buy american cars only, but very recently I have saw government cars bought from foreing car companies.

    The american car companies need to gain back the trust of the car buyers, because the government can give them 100 billion dollars and these companies still will go broke in a near future because they are not selling cars.

    Also, we must remember the old saying that buying a car is the second great invesment after buying a house, and we cannot compare the low quality of small products of other countries at cost of a few dollars with the spending of thousands of dollars in a car. Such comparison is irrelevant like mentioning Walmart or similar in this current scenario comparing cars' manufacturing..

    I think that the american car companies must promise in writing to make equal or greater quality cars with equal or similar warranties, and fullfil their promises. I'll hope they do that so I might buy an american car again in the future.

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    in a neocon's craw
    Last Seen
    04-24-17 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: US car bail-out talks 'collapse'

    Seems to me that we put 700billion up for grabs to the financial sector to stop the bleeding and so they could start giving out loans again but it kinda looks like they are just hording the money to buy out the smaller firms/banks.

    I mean if you plan to give away 700billion, I think a better way to not only jump start the economy but slow/stop the forclosure rate would have been to give the money to the people who filed taxes.

    According to taxfoundation.org 135,660,228 people filed income tax in 2008 (for year 2007). Divide $700,000,000,000 by 135,660,228 = $5159.95

    In a household with 2 working adults that's $10319.90

    Instead we give the money to banks so they can sit on it while the economy worsens and foreclosures continue.

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •